Concorde from zero to Mach 2 in minutes?

[NineEighteen]

I seem to recall reading somewhere that Concorde set a record time to accelerate from a standing start (I believe on the runway at Shannon) to supersonic cruise speed and altitude on one of the "Return to Flight" tests in the early 2000's.

Does anyone know the details? I guess the climb out of JFK was routinely fast but the Shannon departure was straight out and low(ish) fuel so remarkably quick?

I'd be fascinated to read about it again if only I could find the article! :ugh: Or maybe I dreamt the whole thing?

Thanks
0918

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

I understand the record from brakes off to mach 2 at 60,000 ft is just under 9 minutes. It was a positioning flight from Cardiff to Heathrow, so minimum fuel and no pax, and (being next to the sea) no noise abatement.

It did 0 to 250mph on the runway in less than 30 seconds... maybe 18 seconds if very light!

Wow! What an aeroplane. I flew on it once, and it's a highlight of my life (flightdeck jumpseat ride from T/O, to mach 2.02 and 60.000ft, to landing). Just amazing!

SSD

[philbky]

Don't recall any specific records being set ex SNN in the return to service testing but, at the time, there were no SIDs at SNN and no noise restrictions to inhibit ops. SNN would reserve a block of airspace for the ops (as they do for test flights from the various engineering bases at SNN) and the aircraft would normally depart 24 with a right turn out down river heading to the ocean.

One day during the tests they were landing on 06 and it was beautifully clear - a rarity in north Kerry! Being some 35 miles from the airport just south of the (very) extended centreline we sometimes have aircraft on a direct track to Foynes from the ocean when the NAT tracks are favourable.

On this day an ATA L1011 was visible heading toward us from over the Dingle peninsula. Concorde called for an approach from off the ocean on a converging track. As the L1011 passed the house, Concorde had come into view and was catching the ATA and was asked to reduce speed. As the ATA vanished from view Concorde was asked to do a 360 as a problem had occurred on the taxiway and the Tristar would need to back track on the runway to the south western taxiway.

Concorde immediately started a 360 and performed an extended oval, not once but twice, each time encompassing our village at a height of 2,000 feet.

I didn't know it at the time but this was to be the last time I ever saw a Concorde in the air. Having seen the type hundreds of times over the years, I'm not sure if this last time or the time I watched it in the company of awestruck very senior ATC professionals from around the world in the the Tower at LHR, taking off on a wet December night with afterburners glowing and the airport lights shining and reflecting off the rain is my favourite Concorde moment.

[Phileas Fogg]

I think an aircraft at Mach 2 between Cardiff and Heathrow, presuming that it recognised a normal route of airway G1, or even if it went the scenic route of X distance offshore before reaching Mach 1, might have cause something of a problem and one hell of a lot of broken windows.

["Taylor"]

I witnessed her take off that day from Cardiff airport, having over-nighted there for engine checks after suffering compressor surges during the 002 flight back from JFK. She departed runway 30 and flew out along the Bristol Channel and out into the Atlantic for some flight testing before returning to Heathrow. During this test flight she broke her own record for standing start to supersonic flight. These aircraft were still capable of setting world records right up until their demise from active service.:ugh:
Maybe, hopefully one day we'll see one returned to flight for display purposes. Before anyone says not possible...look at the success of the Vulcan program.

[Phileas Fogg]

Bearing in mind that it was the French that brought Concorde's commercial life to an end they are the sneaky ones that have kept one in a 'PDQ airworthy' condition in Toulouse I understand.

I wouldn't have thought 9 minutes till supersonic is anything to shout about, for departures out of Heathrow they have to clear the European mainland before rocketing, Cardiff is not that far from open waters but it could have done it a lot quicker had it been departing somewhere like Shannon heading West.

Well the one that flew from JFK to Seattle, for retirement, broke the record between New York and Seattle. Took the scenic route over Canada with special dispensation to go supersonic over land.

[G SXTY]

I wouldn't have thought 9 minutes till supersonic is anything to shout about

Erm, that wasn't just supersonic, it was 9 minutes to Mach 2. I would suggest that the ability to do that without bonedomes, bangseats or spaceman suits - and with room for 100 punters in the back - is pretty impressive.

From a engineering point of view, I'd say it was the most impressive aircraft ever built.

[Phileas Fogg]

Well the Tu-144 could have achieved it, without bonedomes, bangseats or spaceman suits - and with room for far in excess of 100 punters in the back.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

The TU144 would have needed to return to Cardiff for fuel before going on to Heathrow. It had to use A/B all the time it was supersonic so had no usable range!

Conc could not only get to Mach 2 and 60,000 ft in under 9 minutes, but it could stay there for up to 4.5 hours without the need for mid-air refuelling, With 100 pax in superb champagne-drinking comfort! (A Concorde in supercruise is about 43% thermally efficient - better than any other man made device).

No other aeroplane has ever come remotely close to being able to do that.:ok:

I think an aircraft at Mach 2 between Cardiff and Heathrow, presuming that it recognised a normal route of airway G1, or even if it went the scenic route of X distance offshore before reaching Mach 1, might have cause something of a problem and one hell of a lot of broken windows.

Silly boy! Concorde's mach accel point westbound was the Bristol channel. Cardiff was ideally placed for that Conc to set the record westbound (aeroplane relativrly light, no pax, no noise abatement, close to the in-service accel point), before decel and descent back east to Heathrow.:cool:

[Phileas Fogg]

Well if a TU-144 couldn't operate between CWL and LHR then how on earth did it operate it's scheduled services between Moscow and Almaty? Are you seriously suggesting, silly boy, that it couldn't go from a standstill until Mach 2without refuelling?

And, the recognised route from CWL to LHR is SID to Alvin, Airway G1 and then a STAR into LHR, there was no mention, silly boy, in the original post of it being an air test out of CWL. And, are you suggesting, silly boy, that by doing this route it would do it supersonic and over built up areas?

And, silly boy, to go supersonic an aircraft needs to be X distance from land, and pointing in an appropriate direction to that land, which, from CWL, would be the immediate mainland, Devon & Cornwall and Ireland so, silly boy, it's not as straightforward as it may seem.

And, when I lived in the south west we got a sonic boom nightly because Air France had got their calculations wrong.

And finally 'silly boy':

The Tu-144S model had Kuznetsov NK-144 turbofan engines and could not cruise at Mach 2 without the afterburner on: a maximum cruising speed of Mach 1.6 was possible on "dry" power (afterburner off). The later Tu-144D model featured more powerful Kolesov RD-36-51 turbojet engines with much better fuel efficiency (particularly during supercruise where it was comparable to Concorde's Olympus's, not requiring afterburner) and longer range up to 6200 km. Plans for an aircraft with 7000+km range were never implemented.

[smuff2000]

Wikepedia is a wonderful thing isn't it, but you really should have credited the online encyclopaedia rather than letting us believe you had such exceptional knowlege, however you did miss out a little bit of important information:

The TU144D never entered commercial passenger service it only ever carried freight, also the TU144S which did enter commercial service was only "semi-scheduled, whatever that may mean, therefore Concorde, which I had the pleasure of flying in once, is the only aircraft capable of flying at mach 2 for 3000 odd miles.

SILLY BOY!

[Phileas Fogg]

Much of my knowledge regarding eastern aircraft comes from my other half being Russian, having previously worked for an Antonov operator and having travelled on some of these airliners, although not the Tu-144.

When someone tries to tell me that a Tu-144 couldn't attain Mach 2 in something like nine minutes and didn't even have an endurance to make it from CWL to LHR, well at the end of my previous post I made a quick reference to Wikepedia just to confirm that it was another talking from their @ss and not I.

The question was not regarding an aircraft that could fly 3000 miles at Mach 2, the question was if it could attain Mach 2 in nine minutes and if it could make a trip of some 150 miles between CWL and LHR and the answer to both of those is 'yes'.

And I too flew in Concorde, G-BOAD to be precise and before it entered passenger service ..... and I didn't pay for the trip.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Silly Boy

Are you still under the impression that claim is that a Concorde flew at mach 2 (attained in 9 minutes) on a direct, approximately easterley, Cardiff - Heathrow flight? Your posts indicate that you are, and that a TU144 could do that as well.

The Concorde headed out from Cardiff down the Bristol Channel in a south westerly direction, accellerating and climbing to mach 2 at 60,000ft using the 'in service' accel routing, which it achieved inside 9 minutes from brake release. It then slowed, descended, and turned around so it was relatively low and subsonic approaching the North Devon coast for a subsonic transit to heathrow.

It had min fuel for the ferry flight to Heathrow which certainly helped it achieve the record. My point about 'a TU144 having to return to Cardiff to re-fuel before the transit to Heathrow' was a jibe at its fuel consumption and not to be taken litterally (though with the min fuel uplifted for the ferry, and the 144's need to maintain A/B, that may have litterally have been the case).

I used to part-own a Russian aeroplane - a Yak52. And a very fine aeroplane it was, so I don't have any irrational western 'anti-Russian-aeroplane' bias.

However, no way was the TU144 an aeroplane comparable in any way to Concorde as a practical SST, as the 144's in-service record compared to Concorde's shows.

[Phileas Fogg]

Shagged Out Driver,
The original post indicated a easterly route from CWL to LHR at Mach2, once more information was provided it became apparent that the aircraft departed CWL on an air test before routing for LHR and if you read my previous post you will realise that I realise that.

I am/was a great fan of Concorde, except perhaps the 2 main liveries that it became painted in, and you wouldn't have caught me travelling on a Tu-144, well certainly not in a sober condition but a post was made to the effect that Concorde was the only aircraft caple of Mach2 with 100 passengers and another post was made that the Tu-144 needed reheat to maintain Mach2 and couldn't even make it from CWL to LHR and both these posts were incorrect, indeed you say it was done at minimum weight to achieve that Mach2, well that's not a 100 passenger carrying aircraft capable of achieving Mach2 in 9 minutes as the other post indicated.

I'm no fan of eastern aircraft having flown on such types as AN24, AN140, Tu-134 & Yak42, indeed I'm a fan of Concorde as I say, I was merely clarifying some incorrect information that had been posted.

And ..... the Tu-144 does have something on Concorde ..... a Concorde has never been for sale on ebay :)

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

The original post indicated a easterly route from CWL to LHR at Mach2,

Errr, I don't think so... A moments thought (if even that) would dimiss that as impossible. :eek:

[Phileas Fogg]

OK,i t was the 2nd post, as below, that indicated a flight from CWL to LHR, the sort of cra@p that once was reported in the Sunday Sport that a WWII bomber had been found on the moon. I don't type cr@p, I simply correct it, I can just imagine whistling past Windsor Castle at Mach2!


(I understand the record from brakes off to mach 2 at 60,000 ft is just under 9minutes. It was a positioning flight from Cardiff to Heathrow)

[CV880]

Back in the 80's I attended a local RAeS function where the speaker was a Capt Cook who was BA's Chief Training Captain - Concorde at the time. It was a very interesting presentation and two of his comments have stuck in my mind.
The first was the apparent difficulty new pilots' had levelling off at the circuit height at Prestwick on their first take off in the real machine as its performance at light weights basically overwhelmed them. I recall he said the circuit height was 1,500 feet and nearly every new pilot was unable to anticipate the adjustments required to level off at 1,500 feet. He said he had seen heights up to 4,000 feet with the new boy struggling to get altitude and speed under control.
His other memorable point was at that time there no aircraft in the UK military inventory that could out-accelerate a light Concorde right from brake release.

[aviate1138]

What time did the AF Concordes take to reach Mach 2 when departing from Dakar enroute Rio? It was a non noise abatement take off I understand and straight over the Atlantic as the gear came up.

http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn77/aviate1138/Picture40.jpg

[SpringHeeledJack]

Apologies for thread drift.......:(

What is happening to G-BOAD (caution: disturbing photos) • NYCAviation.com (http://nycaviation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=12589)


Regards


SHJ